Search

Introduction Major trauma is a significant health burden for older patients, with worse clinical outcomes when compared to younger people. Various clinical models exist however it is not clear which have most benefit for older patients. This study aimed to map the current provision of clinical pathways and services for older people with major trauma in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods A cross-sectional online survey was undertaken. Case vignettes designed to reflect 'typical' older major trauma patients were embedded within the survey. The survey was distributed via trauma network managers and social media, inviting responses from all UK hospitals receiving trauma patients in 2020. Fixed choice questions were analysed with descriptive statistics and free text responses categorised into themes. The survey was not deemed to be research using the UK Health Regulatory Authority tool. Results Responses were received from 20/27 Major Trauma Centres (MTCs), 33 Trauma Units (TUs) and two local emergency hospitals. Older patients were defined by age (range 55 to 82 years) or frailty status. Frailty assessment was routinely performed in more than two-thirds (69.1%) of locations. Availability of trauma-specific guidance for older patients varied, and was greater in TUs than MTCs. Analysis of the vignettes showed wide variability in the admission and subsequent interventions for older major trauma patients across hospitals. Qualitative data showed pre-injury health status, staff availability, and day of the week were factors leading to variation within individual hospitals. Conclusion There is wide variation in the processes of care and pathways for older major trauma patients in the UK. Whilst lack of standardisation may be a result of local service configuration this has the potential to impact negatively on quality of care, multi-disciplinary working and outcomes. Understanding the range of variation in practice provides opportunity to identify good practice and areas for improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pre-injury frailty is associated with adverse in-hospital outcomes in older trauma patients, but the association with longer term survival and recovery is unclear. We aimed to investigate post discharge survival and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in older frail patients at six months after Major Trauma Centre (MTC) admission., Methods: This was a multi-centre study of patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted to five MTCs. Data were collected via questionnaire at hospital discharge and six months later. The primary outcome was patient-reported HRQoL at follow up using Euroqol EQ5D-5 L visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included health status according to EQ5D dimensions and care requirements at follow up. Multivariable linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between predictor variables and EQ-5D-5 L VAS at follow up., Results: Fifty-four patients died in the follow up period, of which two-third (64%) had been categorised as frail pre-injury, compared to 21 (16%) of the 133 survivors. There was no difference in self-reported HRQoL between frail and not-frail patients at discharge (Mean EQ-VAS: Frail 55.8 vs. Not-frail 64.1, p = 0.137) however at follow-up HRQoL had improved for the not-frail group but deteriorated for frail patients (Mean EQ-VAS: Frail: 50.0 vs. Not-frail: 65.8, p = 0.009). There was a two-fold increase in poor quality of life at six months (VAS ≤ 50) for frail patients (Frail: 65% vs. Not-frail: 30% p < 0.009). Frailty (β-13.741 [95% CI -25.377, 2.105], p = 0.02), increased age (β -1.064 [95% CI [-1.705, -0.423] p = 0.00) and non-home discharge (β -12.017 [95% CI [118.403, 207.203], p = 0.04) were associated with worse HRQoL at follow up. Requirements for professional carers increased five-fold in frail patients at follow-up (Frail: 25% vs. Not-frail: 4%, p = 0.01)., Conclusions: Frailty is associated with increased mortality post trauma discharge and frail older trauma survivors had worse HRQoL and increased care needs at six months post-discharge. Pre-injury frailty is a predictor of poor longer-term HRQoL after trauma and recognition should enable early specialist pathways and discharge planning., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Research prioritisation exercises are used to determine which areas of research are important. In major trauma care, nurses and allied health professionals are central to the delivery of evidence-based care but their opinions on research priorities are under-represented in the literature. We aimed to identify the research priorities of major trauma nurses and allied health professionals in the UK., Methods: A three-round electronic Delphi study was conducted in the UK between November 2019 and May 2021. Round one aimed to generate research questions with rounds two and three questions in order of priority. In stages two and three responses were analysed using descriptive statistics to compute frequencies and proportions for the ranking of each question., Results: Survey rounds were completed by 180, 100 and 91 respondents respectively. The first round generated 285 statements that were condensed into 71 research questions. Analysis of rankings in subsequent rounds prioritised 54 research questions across themes of adult / children's acute care, psychological care and workforce, training and education., Discussion: Nurses and AHPs are well-positioned to determine research priorities in major trauma care. Focusing on these priorities will guide future research and help to build an evidence-base in trauma care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The introduction of specific pathways of care for older trauma patients has been shown to decrease hospital length of stay and the overall rate of complications. The extent and scope of pathways and services for older major trauma patients in the UK is not currently known., Objective: The primary objective of this study was to map the current care pathways and provision of services for older people following major trauma in the UK., Methods: A cross-sectional survey of UK hospitals delivering care to major trauma patients (major trauma centres and trauma units). Data were collected on respondent and site characteristics, and local definitions of older trauma patients. To explore pathways for older people with major trauma, four clinical case examples were devised and respondents asked to complete responses that best illustrated the admission pathway for each., Results: Responses from 56 hospitals were included in the analysis, including from 25 (84%) of all major trauma centres (MTCs) in the UK. The majority of respondents defined 'old' by chronological age, most commonly patients 65 years and over. The specialty team with overall responsibility for the patient in trauma units was most likely to be acute medicine or acute surgery. Patients in MTCs were not always admitted under the care of the major trauma service. Assessment by a geriatrician within 72 hours of admission varied in both major trauma centres and trauma units and was associated with increased age., Conclusions: This survey highlights variability in the admitting specialty team and subsequent management of older major trauma patients across hospitals in the UK. Variability appears to be related to patient condition as well as provision of local resources. Whilst lack of standardisation may be a result of local service configuration this has the potential to impact negatively on quality of care, multi-disciplinary working, and outcomes., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The UK's relationship with the European Union (EU) is now embodied in two principal legal instruments: the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which formally entered into force on 1 May 2021; and the Withdrawal Agreement, with its Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, which continues to apply. Using a 'building blocks' framework for analysis of national health systems derived from the World Health Organisation, this article examines the likely impacts in the UK of this legal settlement on the National Health Service (NHS), health and social care. Specifically, we determine the extent to which the trade, cooperation and regulatory aspects of those legal measures support positive impacts for the NHS and social care. We show that, as there is clear support for positive health and care outcomes in only one of the 17 NHS 'building blocks', unless mitigating action is taken, the likely outcomes will be detrimental. However, as the legal settlement gives the UK a great deal of regulatory freedom, especially in Great Britain, we argue that it is crucial to track the effects of proposed new health and social care-related policy choices in the months and years ahead.

While policy attention is understandably diverted to COVID-19, the end of the UK's post-Brexit 'transition period' remains 31 December 2020. All forms of future EU-UK relationship are worse for health than EU membership, but analysis of the negotiating texts shows some forms are better than others. The likely outcomes involve major negative effects for NHS staffing, funding for health and social care, and capital financing for the NHS; and for UK global leadership and influence. We expect minor negative effects for cross border healthcare (except in Northern Ireland); research collaboration; and data sharing, such as the Early Warning and Response System for health threats. Despite political narratives, the legal texts show that the UK seeks de facto continuity in selected key areas for pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and equipment [including personal protective equipment (PPE)], especially clinical trials, pharmacovigilance, and batch-testing. The UK will be excluded from economies of scale of EU membership, e.g. joint procurement programmes as used recently for PPE. Above all, there is a major risk of reaching an agreement with significant adverse effects for health, without meaningful oversight by or input from the UK Parliament, or other health policy stakeholders.

Background: There is an extensive body of research demonstrating that trade and globalisation can have wide-ranging implications for health. Robust governance is key to ensuring that health, social justice and sustainability are key considerations within trade policy, and that health risks from trade are effectively mitigated and benefits are maximised. The UK's departure from the EU provides a rare opportunity to examine a context where trade governance arrangements are being created anew, and to explore the consequences of governance choices and structures for health and social justice. Despite its importance to public health, there has been no systematic analysis of the implications of UK trade policy governance. We therefore conducted an analysis of the governance of the UK's trade policy from a public health and social justice perspective., Results: Several arrangements required for good governance appear to have been implemented - information provision, public consultation, accountability to Parliament, and strengthening of civil service capacity. However, our detailed analyses of these pillars of governance identified significant weaknesses in each of these areas., Conclusion: The establishment of a new trade policy agenda calls for robust systems of governance. However, our analysis demonstrates that, despite decades of mounting evidence on the health and equity impacts of trade and the importance of strong systems of governance, the UK government has largely ignored this evidence and failed to galvanise the opportunity to include public health and equity considerations and strengthen democratic involvement in trade policy. This underscores the point that the evidence alone will not guarantee that health and justice are prioritised. Rather, we need strong systems of governance everywhere that can help seize the health benefits of international trade and minimise its detrimental impacts. A failure to strengthen governance risks poor policy design and implementation, with unintended and inequitable distribution of harms, and 'on-paper' commitments to health, social justice, and democracy unfulfilled in practice. Although the detailed findings relate to the situation in the UK, the issues raised are, we believe, of wider relevance for those with an interest of governing for health in the area of international trade.

To what extent does inadequate market regulation contribute to poor health outcomes? A series of prominent scandals involving harmful medical devices has made improving the regulation of these devices an urgent problem for the European Union (EU). This is, however, a specific example of a general phenomenon. The EU remains first and foremost a large and integrated market within which the EU institutions have considerable regulatory authority. Even if there is little EU commitment to a health or social policy agenda, its use of that regulatory authority shapes health care cost and quality and should be understood as health policy. We use data from EU-level and national policy documents to analyse the EU's current regulatory framework for medical devices and assess its likely future efficacy. Despite revising the medical devices directive to require more stringent pre-authorization requirements for high-risk medical devices and improvements in post-market surveillance, the key underlying problems of market fragmentation and patient safety persist. Without strong and consistent support for the implementation of the new directive, the likely result is the status quo, with significant consequences for health in Europe.

Background: Intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces bleeding deaths after injury and childbirth. It is most effective when given early. In many countries, pre-hospital care is provided by people who cannot give i.v. injections. We examined the pharmacokinetics of intramuscular TXA in bleeding trauma patients., Methods: We conducted an open-label pharmacokinetic study in two UK hospitals. Thirty bleeding trauma patients received a loading dose of TXA 1 g i.v., as per guidelines. The second TXA dose was given as two 5 ml (0·5 g each) i.m. injections. We collected blood at intervals and monitored injection sites. We measured TXA concentrations using liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry. We assessed the concentration time course using non-linear mixed-effect models with age, sex, ethnicity, body weight, type of injury, signs of shock, and glomerular filtration rate as possible covariates., Results: Intramuscular TXA was well tolerated with only mild injection site reactions. A two-compartment open model with first-order absorption and elimination best described the data. For a 70-kg patient, aged 44 yr without signs of shock, the population estimates were 1.94 h -1 for i.m. absorption constant, 0.77 for i.m. bioavailability, 7.1 L h -1 for elimination clearance, 11.7 L h -1 for inter-compartmental clearance, 16.1 L volume of central compartment, and 9.4 L volume of the peripheral compartment. The time to reach therapeutic concentrations (5 or 10 mg L -1 ) after a single intramuscular TXA 1 g injection are 4 or 11 min, with the time above these concentrations being 10 or 5.6 h, respectively., Conclusions: In bleeding trauma patients, intramuscular TXA is well tolerated and rapidly absorbed., Clinical Trial Registration: 2019-000898-23 (EudraCT); NCT03875937 (ClinicalTrials.gov)., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Brexit has direct and indirect negative health consequences, whether from economic damage or from the political paralysis and distraction from public health that it has created. Brexit is a public health problem in its own right, as other literature has shown-but, we argue, it is also a symptom of deeper problems in the governance of the United Kingdom. In particular, the combination of executive dominance, partisanship and opacity that give rise to the constitutional casualism of the Brexit decisions has already affected public health policy and will continue to do so unless addressed., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: MMcK receives funding for research and advice from the European Commission, is past president of the European Public Health Association, is a founder of NHS against Brexit (a civil society organisation), and is research director of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, in which the European Commission is a member. TH is a Jean Monnet professor, formerly partially funded by the EU, and is principal investigator in Economic and Social Research Council governance after Brexit grant ES/S00730X/1. MMcK and TH are members of the advisory board NHS against Brexit, an NGO unaffiliated with the NHS, which campaigned to remain in the EU. TH is adviser to the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee.

Objectives: Several decision aids can 'rule in' and 'rule out' acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in the Emergency Department (ED) but all require measurement of blood biomarkers. A decision aid that does not require biomarker measurement could enhance risk stratification at triage and could be used in the prehospital environment. We aimed to derive and validate the History and ECG-only Manchester ACS (HE-MACS) decision aid using only the history, physical examination and ECG., Methods: We undertook secondary analyses in three prospective diagnostic accuracy studies that included patients presenting to the ED with suspected cardiac chest pain. Clinicians recorded clinical features at the time of arrival using a bespoke form. Patients underwent serial troponin sampling and 30-day follow-up for the primary outcome of ACS. The model was derived by logistic regression in one cohort and validated in two similar prospective studies., Results: The HE-MACS model was derived in 796 patients and validated in cohorts of 474 and 659 patients. HE-MACS incorporated age, sex, systolic blood pressure plus five historical variables to stratify patients into four risk groups. On validation, 5.5 and 12.1% (pooled total 9.4%) patients were identified as 'very low risk' (potential immediate rule out) with a pooled sensitivity of 99.5% (95% confidence interval: 97.1-100.0%)., Conclusion: Using only the patient's history and ECG, HE-MACS could 'rule out' ACS in 9.4% of patients while effectively risk stratifying remaining patients. This is a very promising tool for triage in both the prehospital environment and ED. Its impact should be prospectively evaluated in those settings.

All forms of Brexit are bad for health, but some are worse than others. This paper builds on our 2017 analysis using the WHO health system building blocks framework to assess the likely effects of Brexit on the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. We consider four possible scenarios as follows: a No-Deal Brexit under which the UK leaves the EU on March 29, 2019, without any formal agreement on the terms of withdrawal; a Withdrawal Agreement, as negotiated between the UK and EU and awaiting (possible) formal agreement, which provides a transition period until the end of December, 2020; the Northern Ireland Protocol's backstop coming into effect after the end of that period; or the Political Declaration on the Future Relationship between the UK and EU. Our analysis shows that a No-Deal Brexit is substantially worse for the NHS than a future involving the Withdrawal Agreement, which provides certainty and continuity in legal relations while the Political Declaration on the Future Relationship is negotiated and put into legal form. The Northern Ireland backstop has varying effects, with continuity in some areas, such as health products, but no continuity in others. The Political Declaration on the Future Relationship envisages a relationship that is centred around a free-trade agreement, in which wider health-related issues are largely absent. All forms of Brexit, however, involve negative consequences for the UK's leadership and governance of health, in both Europe and globally, with questions about the ability of parliament and other stakeholders to scrutinise and oversee government actions., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In recent years, elements of the modern environment (such as television, Internet, toys and clothes) have been criticized for having an increasingly sexualized or appearance focus, which has been suggested to be detrimental to girls' development. The current study examined the impact of an appearance-focused Internet game on young girls' body image and career cognitions and aspirations. Eighty British girls aged 8-9 years were randomly assigned to play an appearance-focused or a non-appearance focused game for 10 minutes. Girls in the appearance-focused game condition displayed greater body dissatisfaction compared to the control condition. Type of game did not impact girls' perceived capacity to do various jobs. However, girls who played the appearance-focused game reported a greater preference for feminine careers compared to the control group. This provides preliminary evidence that appearance-focused Internet games may be detrimental to young girls' body image and aspirations. Internet games should be included in our consideration of influential messages for young girls.